Attendance Record and Original Agenda
follow Adjournment as Attachments.

Agenda Item I: Call
to Order: Paul Galanti (IUPUI Faculty Vice-President)! Galanti called the
meeting to order at 3:34 and moved directly to the election (Item VI) because
some members had to leave early for a retirement reception.

Agenda Item VI:
Election of Executive and Nominating Committees (slates emailed in advance) --
Ballots Distributed at Meeting: Karen West or Harriet Wilkins (Nominating
Committee Chairs). A quorum of 53 was
needed; 55 were counted. The coordinator and Pfile assisted Wilkins in distributing
the ballots. The results were later reported. 55 ballots were cast. Elected to
the Executive Committee for the two-year term July 1, 1999 through June 30,
2001, were Naomi Fineberg, Gerald Powers, Martin Spechler, and Charlie
Yokomoto. Elected to the Nominating Committee for the two-year term July 1,
1999 through June 30, 2001, were Bart Ng, Carl Rothe, and Kathleen Warfel.
Warfel will chair the committee July 1, 2000 through June 30, 2001. Wilkins
moved with Mannheimer's second that the ballots be destroyed and the tally
sheet kept in the Faculty Council Office. Motion carried.

Agenda Item II:
Approval of Minutes for April 1, 1999 (on web at
"http://www.iupui.edu/~fcouncil/minutes/fc990401html.htm"). J.
Keck moved with Mary Fisher's second that the minutes of April 1, 1999 be
approved. Motion carried.

Agenda Item III:
Chancellor's Report: Gerald Bepko (IUPUI Chancellor & IU Vice-President). Bepko began by introducing Valerie Eickmeier,
Interim Dean of the Herron School of Art, and inviting to her give an update on
the activities of the Campus Arts Committee which she chairs. Eickmeier
reported that the first task of the committee was to draft an art policy for
only the IUPUI campus, but the task soon expanded to include all campuses. The
policy essentially states that all campuses will have arts committees to
maintain specifications on how to proceed with art at their individual campus.
The first idea of the plan states that a sculpture can be temporarily sited at
a campus for up to a year without Trustee approval. The second idea of the plan
concerns the determination of public spaces within the schools and how to site
artwork for those spaces. So far, $10,000 has been raised to initiate this
plan. Separate subcommittees will engage in fundraising, orchestrate the
sculptures, and work with deans to identify the proper artworks for the various
public spaces in the schools. The committee will also serve to look at gifts of
artwork and if they are in alignment with IU's aims, decide whether to accept them.
The committee is also involved with a restoration project. Anna Melodia (Campus
Interrelations Office) and Jerry Stuff (University Architect's Office) have
submitted a grant proposal to restore the Eve statue to the walled gardens
(north of Ball Residence), but there has been no word yet on its approval.
Last, with the art on sculpture walk, IUPUI has collaborated with the White
River State Park and in two weeks an artwork will be sited on the Washington
Street pedestrian bridge.

Bepko commented that
the work of the Campus Arts Committee and the move of the Herron School of Art
to the campus will have an extraordinary impact on the campus over the next
several years, and he hoped that all would observe this and join in to make a
decade of the arts that will celebrate the visual and aesthetic dimensions of
life in the university community.

Bepko also
distributed four memos summarizing the completed 1998/99 administrative reviews
of Trudy Banta (Vice-Chancellor for Planning and Institutional Improvement),
Angela McBride (Nursing School Dean), Norman Lefstein (Law School Dean), and
Mark Grove (Registrar and Leader of IUPUI's Student Service Effort). Over the
summer the administration will work with the Executive Committee to determine
whom to review during the 1999/00 academic year. When completed the report will
be posted to the FC members.

The Indiana state
legislature adjourned last Thursday, except for a special one-day session in
June, but it is unlikely they will take up any budget matters that involve the
university. We hope there is no tampering with the results of the legislative
session because they were on balance good for the university. Generally, they
were in keeping with the income of the state and the surpluses that have built
up and that has been the subject of so much commentary in the news media. On
the operating side, the budgets were built on the assumption that there would
be a 4% increase in total compensation and a 2% increase for all other
categories of the budget, resulting in the expectation of a total increase in
the budget in the 3.6% range. However, more was added to the university
budgets: .5% of the base (or 1/2 of 1%) is being added for technology. There is
also an additional 2.3% of the total university base provided for technology in
cash for this biennium to be administered by the Indiana State Budget Agency
and ICHE (Indiana Commission for Higher Education) in accordance with some
formulas they are developing. We hope that the laws of thermodynamics which are
applicable in so many other state government situations will not operate in
this case. As you know, one law states that whenever heat is transferred a
little is lost, but we hope we won't lose any of this funding when it is
transferred to us from the state through the budget agency and the commission.
All in all, on the operating side, those are good results, given the less than
2% inflation rate. We will have some limited flexibility, with a total increase
in appropriation of about 6% for the first year and 3.6% for the second. There
will also be income and an increase in income coming from tuition and other
income, so we should have a reasonable year making budgets in the academic
units. Tuition for undergraduate students at IUPUI will be set about 3.5%
higher. Other tuitions will be about the same except for some professional
schools which will be higher due to a special arrangement. In addition to the
base increases for operating purposes there were also some other extraordinary
events this year. The 21st Century Research and Technology Fund is a direct
reflection of the emphasis made by President Myles Brand and Dean Robert Holden
among others who made the case that higher education needs to be directly
linked to economic development which in the case of Indiana surely includes the
health industry, or to health, wellness, longevity, and the quality of life,
and to the products and services that will help people live longer and feel
better. From Eli Lilly to Guidant to Roche to hundreds of small companies to
health care providers to hospitals big and small -- all are going to be
expanding their activities, and as the rest of the world starts to catch up
with us in terms of these features of life, our products and services are going
to be in great demand all the world around. Indiana needs to be conscious of
this and position itself for the future by making strategic investments. The
most notable of these investments is the 21st Century Research and Technology
Fund which we have been calling the Biomedical Research Initiative. In terms of
its functional operation, it will primarily consist of medical research. The
manner of its administration will favor and focus on the health industry. It is
being established so that it will be available to the universities (primarily IU
and primarily the Indianapolis campus) to help strengthen our infrastructure
and our capacity to compete successfully for the expanding base of National
Institutes of Health funding. This is an extremely important strategic
investment for the state. There will be $25 million a year for the next two
years and we think it will also be continued after that. $50 million is not bad
as a pool of funding to increase our capacity to successfully compete. In turn,
we hope this results in more federal research money coming into Indiana, and
that this leads to more of the critical mass and magnet that is needed to
attract people here and thus strengthen the health industry in Indiana.

In addition to that,
because of the strong case made for the health industry, the Indiana state
legislature did not just take the university's priorities in the order they
were presented, but because of State Senator Lawrence Borst's bills in
particular, appropriated another $50 million, including $20 million for
upgrading the three regional medical centers located at South Bend, Gary, and
Terre Haute, and $30 million for the second phase of the Van Nuys Medical
Science Building and the Barnhill Mall, creating a structure suitable for 21st
century medical education. That's another $50 million directed towards this
health industry emphasis to make us competitive.

With the Indiana
state legislature, we put an emphasis on information technology, especially on
IUPUI and IU becoming the center of the new growing technology fields. We noted
the proposed new School of Informatics, which we'll discuss later today, the
New Media Programs which we have developed over the last couple of years, and
the location of Internet2 and TransPac on this campus. We made a big push for
funding for the new communications / technology complex which will house the
University Information Technology Services Offices as well as the
infrastructure for Internet2 and TransPac, but which was also envisioned to
house the classrooms and academic programs now at the Mary Cable Building. IU
advocated for the whole project and it was presented as one item in its first
version to the legislative house but they came back saying they could fund only
one-half of it, the Mary Cable part and not the technology part (UITS and Internet2
and TransPac). The governor expressed concern because the state has already put
up a good deal of money for the information technology part, and asked that the
project be flip-flopped, so in the version that went to the legislative senate
the request was only for the technology part and the Mary Cable part was
dropped. President Brand wanted the whole project funded at the same time
because it would be awkward to build the two parts of the same project at
different times, and also because there was an urgent need to replace the Mary
Cable Building. The governor committed to trying to pull it off. The
legislature only passed the senate version which funds the technology part but
not the Mary Cable part. This was our one disappointment in a year where IU and
especially IUPUI did better than at any other time in memory. The only drawback
is that funds toreplace the Mary Cable
Building were not included, but President Brand said we will launch an effort
during the short session of 2000 if the budget is open to include the rest of
the project. It is unclear how we will build the one building and not the
other. We may have to return to the drawing board. All in all though we
received very good news from the general assembly.

We had three
groundbreakings, as we announced at the last meeting, starting with the new
Herron ceramics facility on Stadium Drive, and then the new child care center,
and then the new law school. Construction of the new law school will begin in a
few weeks, and shortly after that, the new child care center. The construction
of the ceramics facility has already begun. If we're lucky, Mannheimer will
review it in the StarNewspaper.

We were asked to
give a thumbnail on some of the other projects on campus like housing, the new
campus or student center, and the child care facility. Vice-Chancellor Bob
Martin will address these.

Martin reported that
construction documents for the child care facility are being finalized and bids
will occur in June. After one is accepted construction will begin with an
anticipated opening of the Fall semester of 2000. The program statement for the
student center is winding down and being reviewed by student groups and the
administration. The document will then be finalized and sent to the Stern
architectural firm which was selected a year ago. The trustees have asked for
another feasibility study for housing. The study has been initiated and will
include input from a student survey due tomorrow (May 7) as well as marketplace
considerations. By the end of May we expect that a positive recommendation to
go forward with the housing project (put together by Anderson Inc. out of
Washington DC) will be made to IUPUI and then to the Chancellor and then to the
Trustees. Also, activity on the new law school building has begun.

Galanti requested
that Martin go ahead with agenda item XI, "New Snow Emergency Procedures
Implemented, & Report on Capital Improvements." Martin reported that
with the work of Mark Grove and the Registrar Office a call-in line is now
working, with one pre-recorded message for the day and another for the evening
as to closings. An internal notification plan has also been improved and will
be tested this summer as part of the preparation for Y2K. Most significant
though is the one number that students or faculty can call to find out if
anything is closed.

After some
discussion on the need for better campus signage, especially for the Nursing
School, Baldwin suggested that it be campus policy that every entrance to every
building have a sign posted that names the building and gives the two-letter
designation that the maps use. This would especially aid walkers at the
beginning of the school year. The suggestion received applause and Chancellor
Bepko endorsed it as a good idea to which to return at the first FC meeting for
the Fall semester (1999).

Chancellor Bepko
then ended his report with two final items. Generating applause, Bepko
announced that ICHE (Indiana Commission for Higher Education) had changed its
number of higher education "tiers" from three to four and then from
four to zero. Never say never but it appears ICHE will never broach this way of
tiers again. If there is to be anything of that sort it will be through
altering the campus mission in general. Stan Jones in particular (of ICHE) said
to the Campus Board of Advisors (chaired by Bob McKinney) that the mission and
vision of IUPUI to be one of the nation's great urban campuses needs to be
taken and worked with instead, so as to rally everyone to achieve that vision
for the city and the state. So we hope we've heard the last of the tiers.

Last, Bepko noted
that the Consultant, Grenzebach Glier & Associates, out of Chicago, has
reported in its feasibility study for the Campaign for IUPUI that everything
was positive and encouraging except that we ought to be more conservative for
the first campus-wide campaign and adjust our original $275 million by aiming
at only $125 million for the School of Medicine and $75 million for the other
schools, during the quiet phase of the campaign. The report generally was very
positive and claimed that the future of the state of Indiana will depend on the
future of the Indianapolis region which will in turn depend on the future of
IUPUI. The campus and the community are now ready after thirty years so its
time to launch this campaign and blow the roof off this $200 million goal (as
we have with other campaigns) and thus solidify our position as one of the
increasingly more important institutions of higher education in the state.

One more last thing:
before moving on to the president's report (and after the laughter died down),
Bepko promised Keffer and some others that they would receive their promised
extra-large Jaguar t-shirts, after she pointed out that at the first meeting of
the 1998/99 academic year (the only one she had to miss) the t-shirts were
distributed to everyone there and the promise was made to bring more for those
not then present, and after she pointed out that she had faithfully attended
every meeting since then in hopes of receiving one, and after she pointed out
that this was her final meeting after four years of dedicated service. Thanks
to Bob Martin, the t-shirts were made available at the end of the meeting, and
J. Keck also took some to the Nursing retirement reception for those like
Keffer who had to leave early.

Agenda Item IV:
President's Report: Rebecca Porter (IUPUI Faculty President & UFC
Co-Secretary). Porter started off
her final report for the academic year by looking back at what the FC has been
able to accomplish in the past academic year. Since the August 1998 meeting,
the Disruptive Student Conduct Policy was adopted, as was the Policy on
Transfer, Merger, Reorganization, Reduction, and Elimination of Academic
Programs. The proposed Policy on Regularizing and Improving the Employment of
Non-tenure Track Faculty was sent back to committee. The proposal for a new
School of Informatics was considered and will be voted on later today.
Revisions in the IUPUI Faculty and Librarian Review and Enhancement Policy, and
the Dismissal Policy, were considered and will be voted on for adoption later
today. Revisions in the processes involved in dealing with campus closings due
to snow were requested, and you earlier heard the outcome of that request.
Activities affecting our campus were monitored, and with the Chancellor's
"State of the Campus Address," the good that is IUPUI was celebrated.
Thanks to everyone for their demonstration of the best qualities of university
citizenship through your service on the council and on committees, with a
special thank-you to the committee chairs and to the members of the executive
committee for all their work, and with a very special thank-you to the members
of the council who are now completing their term of service with this last
meeting. [They were asked to stand and receive applause of appreciation.]

Porter reported that
she, Chancellor Bepko, and Executive Vice-Chancellor Plater met with the Board
of Trustees committee that is reviewing dismissal policies from each of the
campuses. There are still some concerns with wording and some conceptual
problems with our policy for dismissal for incompetence. We will address those
concerns over the summer and anticipate that we will return to the council for
some action in the fall. President Brand's review will be discussed tomorrow
(May 7) at the Board of Trustees meeting. The newspapers will be there so you
might check out what they report this weekend.

Finally, Porter told
everyone she hoped they would enjoy their break away from council meetings and
that she looked forward to seeing them at the first meeting for the fall
semester (September 2).

Agenda Item V:
President's Annual Summary Report on Review Boards and Mediation -- Rebecca
Porter. President Porter explained that Bylaw Article IV.F.9 of the
Constitution calls for the president to report a summary at the May Faculty
Council meeting of the information on the activities of the Boards of Review
and the Mediation Committee for the past academic year, including the number
received of requests for review, the number of cases and the types of
grievances assigned, the findings and recommendations, and the extent to which
those recommendations were sustained by administrative action. She reported
that at the time of this report last May (1998), one Board of Review case was
in progress, and that the Executive Committee had received six written requests
for review of administrative actions during this academic year. One case was
assigned to the Mediation Committee and five cases were assigned to review
boards. All review boards had completed their work at that time. Of the seven
total cases, in one case the nature of the grievance dealt with promotion, in
four others with tenure, in one with work conditions, and in one with salary
adjustment. Regarding case resolutions, one case was withdrawn prior to the
hearing, the review board found some of the contentions meritorious in one case
but the grievant resigned before any actions could be taken, the review boards
upheld the administrative action in four of the cases, and one case remains in
process. In those cases in which recommendations were made the Chancellor acted
in concert with the recommendations.

Agenda Item VII:
Proposal for School of Informatics -- Darrel Bailey (New Media), Mike Dunn
(IUB), Jim Baldwin (Academic Affairs Chair), and Rich Pfile (Budgetary Affairs
Chair) (full proposal on web at "http://informatics.indiana.edu/proposal.html."). [DISCUSSION AND VOTE ITEM: 20
Minutes]. On behalf of the IUPUI Faculty Council Executive Committee, Porter
moved that the following proposal for the School of Informatics be endorsed by
the IUPUI Faculty Council.

"Acting on the recommendations of the Budgetary Affairs
Committee and the Academic Affairs Committee, the IUPUI Faculty council
endorses the formation of the Indiana University School of Informatics to be
co-located at IUPUI and IUB, subject to the following conditions: 1) courses
and degrees (including those currently pending) shall be reviewed and approved
by the established process on each campus where the courses or degrees are to
be offered; 2) site-specific approval for IUPUI shall be sought from ICHE
(Indiana Commission for Higher Education) for all degrees offered in whole or
in part at IUPUI so that such degrees will be awarded and recorded on this
IUPUI campus; 3) proposals for new degrees shall contain information analyzing
the marketability of the new graduates; 4) any new state-allocated or
university-level allocated resources for the School of Informatics shall be
distributed equitably between IUPUI and IUB; 5) income from student fees,
grants, contracts, professional service, or other school activities, shall
remain on the campus where the activity takes place except that established
procedures for sharing income through distance learning and cross-campus
research will be encouraged; 6) faculty appointed solely to the School of
Informatics shall be approved in accord with campus procedures on the campus of
their primary appointment; and 7) a formal assessment of the School shall be completed
before the end of the seventh year (i.e., spring of 2006) in accord with
established program review criteria with an interim assessment of progress
toward meeting the proposed purpose and objectives of the School completed at
the end of the third year. The results of each assessment shall be made
available to the IUPUI and IUB Faculty Councils."

Darrell Bailey, Director of the New Media Program, and
Associate Director of the proposed School of Informatics, opened the discussion
by pointing out that the proposal was brought before the FC at its previous
meeting (April 1), had been brought before the IUB Faculty Council, and that
several other groups and committees had dealt with it. He then spoke to the
issue of whether Informatics has usurped New Media. Bailey pointed out that net
gains have been made that New Media alone would not have brought about, e.g.,
several bachelor's and master's degrees have been added, many health and
information technology concerns have increased, and through input from Riegenstrief,
Allied Health, Nursing, Engineering & Technology, Science, Liberal Arts,
and Herron Design, the possibilities Informatics offers have expanded. Also,
possibilities of partnerships with the private sector have opened up with
regard to the issue of replacing the Mary Cable Building with a
technology/classroom building.

Mike Dunn, Director of the Informatics Office, added that
prospects for external funding are high, commented that the proposal from FE is
friendly, even though technical, and ensured the group that they could count on
the equitable distribution mentioned in the fourth condition. Spechler raised
the issue of the number of students for the new school with regard to IUB and
IUPUI, and whether the income generated would remain at IUPUI. Dunn thinks the
numbers will be close and pointed out that the income is already remaining with
IUPUI. Dunn added one last word. An advisory group of about 58 people from both
IUB and IUPUI (out of computer science, electrical engineering, library and information
science, telecommunications, et. al.) unanimously approved the proposal at its
last meeting.

Pfile, Budgetary Affairs Chair, added that the school will
likely add students to the campus, and that much of its infrastructure is
already here. So, either the students will generate tuition, or if not, it will
have little impact.

Baldwin, Academic Affairs Chair, said his committee was
impressed with the number of academic hurdles this proposal has already jumped,
and added that Bailey had already addressed most of their concerns at one of
their meetings. He did however point to one possible major problem emerging in
the future between IUB and IUPUI due to the center of the school's
administration being located at IUB while the school's center of gravity will
be at IUPUI. As a final note he pointed out that this will be the 23rd
degree-granting school at IUPUI.

Spechler raised some questions regarding the emphasis on
undergraduate and graduate students with regard to IUB and IUPUI. He asked if
IUB would handle the undergraduate end primarily leaving IUPUI the graduate?
Dunn replied that both will emphasize the undergraduate degrees for now, but
that as the interest in the graduate degrees takes off, IUB will likely
concentrate on the masters in human/computer interaction and chemical
informatics with IUPUI concentrating on the masters in health and bio
informatics. The proposal currently calls for no Ph.D. to be offered. Bailey
pointed out that there will be 143 New Media undergraduate students and 53
graduate students in the fall. He noted that President Brand's original charge
called for the development of an undergraduate program at IUB only, but that it
has already far outgrown that charge, and that the proposal before the FC
offers many opportunities.

Schmenner asked where the funds are coming from and what it
will cost. Dunn replied that the intent will be to request legislative funding,
but that one million from the Strategic Directions Initiative will get them
through 2001 until the legislative funding can take over. It remains a question
whether enrollment alone can make it go. Schmenner asked if the school would be
a black hole with regard to funds? Dunn replied that a pro-forma indicated the
income would be greater than the expenses at both campuses. Rogers asked if
this would be due to schools transferring funds to Informatics and so showing
only a zero sum gain? Dunn replied that 90% of the funds will come from new
enrollments. Wilson (Slocum alternate) commented that the new school will only
help enrollment and presented as evidence the fact that having the New Media
program at IUPUI has only helped increase Computer Science enrollments.

Russell requested a response to the rumor he has heard
circulate among agitated faculty at Liberal Arts, namely that the original plan
called for the school to be centered at IUPUI with all funds and monies staying
here, but that President Brand personally intervened and stole the school.
Others present confirmed the circulation of the story. Chancellor Bepko
responded that President Brand has provided leadership which we should applaud.
His effort in no way intended to diminish our capacity at IUPUI, and as Darrel
Bailey has pointed out, will in fact make us better and has now made the
school's potential much greater than it would have been. It is important that
we embrace with enthusiasm the opportunities that multicampus schools offer.
The future of higher education will involve more and more multicampus
substantive intellectually-grounded activity, not getting together as an
adjunct to our academic work, but really heavyweight intellectual activity
between campuses. We are on the cutting edge here, not only with New Media and
Informatics but in a lot of other ways between Bloomington and Indianapolis. In
this corridor that also extends to Lafayette and which we've talked about for
years, we can find some of the most interesting long-term opportunities for
creating academic and research programs and also some of the most exciting
opportunities to be found anywhere in the country. We need to keep this in mind
as a foundation for thinking about New Media and Informatics. Finally, Darrel
Bailey and Michael Dunn are exemplars of the kinds of faculty leaders for these
kinds of programs. Darrel has done extraordinary things for this community and
is well known also in Bloomington. Michael Dunn is not as well known here but
his work with Informatics here has shown him to be a fine colleague, a skillful
leader, and a person sensitive to the concerns here expressed. So, the rumor is
not well-founded. We should not be worried but should look at the facts as they
develop and the assurances that are promised. This is really an exciting
opportunity for everyone.

Galanti called for the FC to proceed with the motion before
it. No second was necessary since the motion came from the Executive Committee,
so he called the question. There were only three "nays" so the
proposal was endorsed.

Agenda Item VIII:
"Proposed Revision May 1999 ("Faculty Review and Enhancement"
& "Dismissal Procedures for Tenured Faculty and Librarians") --
Karen Gable (Faculty Affairs Chair) & Rebecca Porter (Executive Committee
Chair) (first presented at FC990401) (emailed earlier and on web at http://www.iupui.edu/~fcouncil/documents/proposedrevisionsfc990401html.html
[DISCUSSION AND VOTE ITEM: 20 Minutes]. On behalf of the Executive
Committee, Porter moved that the FC adopt the proposed revisions in the
"IUPUI Faculty and Librarian Review and Enhancement" policy and the
"IUPUI Dismissal Procedures for Tenured Faculty and Librarians"
policy, as specified in the document labeled "Proposed Revisions May
1999" and attached to the agenda for this meeting. Kennedy seconded the
motion.

Gable (Faculty Affairs Chair) reported that the Faculty
Affairs Committee approved the proposed revisions, but with the following
stipulations included in a letter to Dean Plater on May 3rd: "At the April
23 meeting of the IUPUI Faculty Affairs Committee, the action was taken to
approve the proposed revision of the IUPUI Faculty and Librarian Review and
Enhancement document. The action will be reported at the next IUPUI Faculty
Council meeting. This letter expresses our concerns about several aspects of
the implementation of the new policy. The Faculty Affairs Committee directed me
to identify the three remaining areas of concern that should be considered for
further clarification, consideration, or possible revision. 1) A major concern
is that the review process initiated at the school level should reflect at
least two consecutive annual reviews representing at least two years work to
indicate performance as unsatisfactory. Although it is generally interpreted
that two consecutive annual reviews would represent at least two full years of
work, the possibility exists that the review period could in reality reflect
only a segment of a year rather than an entire year. 2) The Faculty Affairs
Committee also expressed concern that faculty members, at the time the revised
document is disseminated, should once again be made aware of the existing
accessibility to the faculty grievance process, i.e., the Board of Review for
addressing specific instances of perceived inappropriate post-tenure review
procedures. 3) The Faculty Affairs Committee recommends that it actively
participate in identifying criteria for the evaluation of school policies
related to the Review and Enhancement document, and in assessing IUPUI and
school policies related to the proposed document. The committee thanks you for
your attention to these concerns as the document becomes operational."

Spechler, while recognizing the good work put into this
document by many persons such as Bill Plater and Sara Hook, nevertheless
opposed it for two reasons: it weakens tenure and is unnecessary. He urged that
it be tabled until matters could be rectified. He lead the FC through the most
objectionable parts of the document on pages 4.8, 4.11, and 4.13. Thus, he
contended the possibility exists that a tenured faculty member can be found
incompetent and dismissed because their performance is unsatisfactory to the
extent that it demonstrates being incapacitated. That weakens tenure
significantly. Against this it can be argued that this represents only a small
window and that safeguards have also been established. But the window at some
schools is getting larger, and deans are specifying grounds on which a
unsatisfactory tenured faculty member can be dismissed. Secondly, it is
unnecessary. We passed a policy on post-tenure review which stated that a
person could be terminated only for violating the commonly understood rules of
professional conduct and not for unsatisfactory performance of one's duties as
a teacher or researcher. The UFC policy, which has been approved by the
Trustees as well as the UFC, is quite sufficient. We could just simply tell the
schools to proceed as their judgment indicates but within the guidelines
approved by the UFC and Trustees. The UFC document had substantial impact from
the IUPUI representatives and is a true statewide university document and not
simply a IUB document. We can embrace it and bypass this.

Porter responded that the UFC document mandates that each
campus shall develop procedures to review, remediate, and sanction faculty
conduct. We can not simply rest with the UFC document. Our campus must adopt
specific procedures to implement this process. We can have a difference of
opinion on whether this document weakens tenure or not -- I think it does not
-- but we can not go back to the Trustees without our procedures. Trustee
Richardson has just called for each campus to send him their campus-specific
procedures, so even if we don't approve these, we will still need others.
Fisher commented that tenure that protects those who are incompetent weakens
tenure more than having this small window. The legislature can do away with
tenure, but if we keep our house in order that won't have to happen. J. Keck
commented that this document would have served extremely well in two cases she
was involved in where tenure was the issue. Vessely commented that this
document would also more importantly have served those people who were being
reviewed. Webb called for the question. There was only one "nay" so
the proposed revisions were approved. Mannheimer commented that the issue was
more than heated throughout the year in the Faculty Affairs Committee, but that
the Chair, Karen Gable, handled matters very well and deserved to be
congratulated. [Applause]

Agenda Item IX:
Annual Report on University College -- Scott Evenbeck (Dean) [INFORMATION ITEM:
15 Minutes]. Evenbeck distributed a
supplementary handout to accompany the University College Update (May 6, 1999)
which was attached to the agenda. The FC approved the formation ofUniversity College (UC) two years ago. At
the last May FC meeting (1998) he reported on the planning year. UC began in
earnest the fall semester of 1998. Using an overhead, Evenbeck displayed the UC
mission and the 35 founding faculty. The mission statement reads: "UC is
the academic unit at IUPUI which provides a common gateway to the academic
programs available to entering students. UC coordinates existing university
resources and develops new initiatives to promote academic excellence and
enhance student persistence. It provides a setting where faculty, staff, and
students share in the responsibility for making IUPUI a supportive and
challenging environment for learning." The 35 founding faculty are: Sarah
Baker, Andrew Barth, Robert Bringle, David Burr, Joe Christian, Jeremy Dunning,
LaForrest Garner, Cliff Goodwin, Linda Haas, Sharon Hamilton, Barbara Jackson,
William Kulsrud, Raima Larter, N. Douglas Lees, Monroe Little, Ann Lowenkron,
David Malik, Debra Mesch, Alan Mikesky, Theodore Mullen, Bart Ng, Richard Emery
Nickolson, Gregor Novak, Obioma Nnaemeka, John O'Loughlin, William Orme, David
Papke, Michael Parsons, Rebecca Porter, Irene Queiro-Tajalli, Stanley
Sunderwirth, Rosalie Vermette, Richard Ward, Jeff Watt, and Dorothy Webb. Their
participation has been extensive and the university owes them a great deal of
gratitude for their work on founding University College at IUPUI. On October 2,
1998, UC was officially founded, and on July 1, 1998, the old library building
was dedicated as the new University College Building.

A central concern at
IUPUI generally and with the UC in particular is who is to be served and who
will be admitted. Two kinds of mistakes are possible, one more serious for us
than the other. Its not a mistake to admit students who succeed or to deny
admission to students who would not have succeeded if admitted. But it is a
mistake to admit students who don't succeed. This mistake is emphasized by
elite institutions, who should be more selective. But it is also a mistake to
not admit students who would have succeeded, and this mistake is one often
emphasized by public institutions like ourselves. We must not make this
mistake. At IUPUI, students who it might be thought won't do well, often do. We
do not want to make the mistake of denying admittance to students who would
have succeeded. Those students, once admitted, are dealt with by the UC. Our
admittance rate has increased from 55% to 71% but we have maintained a steady
rate of retention among those who participate in our learning communities. The
retention rate has been sustained even with rising admission rates at UC due to
the success of our learning communities. Much money and time is devoted to
supplemental instruction or mentoring. The whole premise of students mentoring
other students is the key to our retention success. To maximize benefits, the
student culture centers on learning, with students learning together. Another
program UC has instituted that is working out well is our Early Warning System
where a letter is sent to each of the faculty asking if the UC student is
having any problem. Assessment, especially of student learning outcomes, is
all-important.

Evenbeck then
addressed the agenda for the future of the UC. The UC is focusing on the
possibility of broadening the student learning communities into external
learning communities that embrace almost all students (85-90%), and which
include service learning. The School of Business has done especially well with
its service learning. Collaborative governance, which includes but expands
faculty governance, is being instituted, and will be a central concern.
Students who register will not be permitted to complete registration before
signing up to belong to a learning community. Advisors are proactive with
students seeking them out and not waiting for them to initiate contact. The UC
is now engaged in reappointing some faculty and appointing some new faculty.

Evenbeck closed
inviting the council members to attend the UC's free summer orientation May
17th and again October 6-8.

At this point,
Executive Vice-Chancellor Plater distributed a memo on the Community College
System and IUPUI (May 6, 1999). Plater explained that the UC is especially
important now with Indiana's coming community college system. IUPUI has for
some ten years been collaborating with Ivy Tech, but this new initiative
provides a great opportunity for IUPUI to craft its future. The formation of UC
was the first decisive step. The second was the Honors Program. IUPUI will now,
however, have to shift its emphasis away from remediation (which Ivy Tech will
provide) to focus on learning communities, instructional teams, and
supplemental instruction or mentoring. IUPUI will need to rethink its
admissions policies and practices. Several other issues will need to go through
committees and come to the council, and there is little time over the summer to
take advantage of the opportunity, but optimism is still counseled. The UC
faculty under Dean Evenbeck's leadership has been asked to collaborate with the
School of Education to plan and implement a new model of student academic
support which will allow IUPUI to undertake this transformational step in our
undergraduate programs. In cooperation with the Council of Deans and our
academic support services, the FC will need to develop a full agenda of action
items to be undertaken during the year. The FC will likely need to be prepared
to take action early in the fall semester. Questions or comments were solicited
by Dean Plater.

Porter pointed out
that Evenbeck's annual report to the FC on University College occurs because
the FC mandated it with its approval, and that the annual reports will continue
until the FC decides it is no longer necessary.

Agenda Item X: Report
on Outcome of Gender/Racial Salary Equity Review -- Pat Rooney & Paul
Carlin [INFORMATION ITEM: 10 Minutes]. Rooney distributed a chart and used the overhead to explain the pay
equity analysis. The chart breaks the data down by school but Rooney spoke only
to the summary data. 83 faculty were identified by the regressive analysis as
being one standard deviation below their projected salary when controls for
certain parameters like rank and terminal degree are used. 15 of those
identified have now retired, resigned, changed rank, or were denied tenure. 6
of those identified requested that they not be reviewed. 23 additional others
(apart from the 83 identified) petitioned for a review. 55 faculty to date have
been reviewed. 24 of those were recommended for a pay adjustment. 23 of those
received pay adjustments.

Agenda Item XII:
Approval of the Academic Calendar -- Jim Baldwin (Academic Affairs Committee
Chair) and Mark Grove (Registrar). Grove
reported that in 1992 the FC decided it wished to annually approve the academic
calendar. The calendar from 1999 to 2020 was unanimously approved by the
Academic Affairs Committee. There have been no significant changes. Grove
explained that IUPUI will not have a week long break in the fall; IUB does but
it also has three days less in the fall than the spring; IUPUI will not do
that. N. Fineberg moved with Gregory's second that the calendar be approved
through 2010. Motion carried.

Agenda Item XIII-XV:
Question / Answer Period, Unfinished Business, and New Business. With the arrival of jaguar t-shirts at the
back of the room, and amid thanks to Bob Martin, J. Keck took some to the
Nursing Reception.